Boomer Sooner!

By Paul Lukas, on July 2nd, 2014

Click to enlarge

Oklahoma released a new set of alternate uniforms yesterday. According to the press release, these uni will “occasionally supplement” the team’s standard home and road looks, which remain unchanged. The new designs “won’t be something we do constantly, but it will be a nice change-up,” said Coach Bob Stoops. That sounds like a refreshingly restrained approach.

Quick assessment: The collars, number font, and red “horns” on the white jersey are all miserable, and the “wood grain” details on the jersey and helmet are the standard Nike gimmickry. I do like the white helmet, though. In short: Not awful, but why would anyone choose these over the home and road primaries? (Lots of additional photos and info here.)

Meanwhile: New ESPN column today — my take on several of the uni-centric news stories that broke while I was away on vacation. Link coming soon.

+ + + + +

Collector’s Corner

By Brinke Guthrie

There’s an obscure typeface-related reason why this 1971 Detroit Lions media guide leads off this week’s CC. That font is called Peignot, and it was developed in 1937 by artist A.M Cassandre. It’s used in The Mary Tyler Moore Show’s classic opening sequence, along with the Beatles movie Help!, the ABC Movie of the Week from 1969-1975, the movie Love Story, and others. I showed my wife, Cindi, the Lions guide and said “What does that typeface remind you of?” Without hesitating, she said, “Mary Tyler Moore.” I’m very proud.

Moving along to other finds:

• Now this is one trippy Wilson NFL football. That’s what happens when you get the Peter Max treatment.

• You too can be a KC Royal Rooter with this 1970s mesh tee — as long as you’re a kids size M, that is.

• Here’s a great Atlanta Falcons helmet medallion from 1970, still in the packaging. Has an adhesive strip on the back. And only $12.50? Too bad they ended the listing.

• Here’s a “Challenge Football” game game 1972. Is that your guy Kenny Willard on the cover there, PL? [Sure looks like it! ”” PL]

• This 1970s Yankees bullpen buggy is still sealed in the package, and can be yours for under $50. (I’m not sure the Yankees actually used a bullpen buggy during this period, but they did use did use this famous bullpen car.)

Seen something on eBay or Etsy that you think would make good Collector’s Corner fodder? Send your submissions here.

+ + + + +

Let it bleed: I began donating blood after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001 and have kept at it ever since. Here in NYC, they let you donate every two months (I don’t know what the rules are elsewhere), and I always make a new appointment as soon as I’m eligible for one. As long as you’re okay with needles, which I am, it’s a very easy way to be a good person — doesn’t take much time, doesn’t cost anything, and you get free Lorna Doones at the end.

Now I’ve apparently hit some kind of milestone, as you can see from my new donor card, which arrived unexpectedly in yesterday’s mail. There’s something hilarious about it — “The Gallon Club,” it sounds vaguely pornographic. Frankly, after nearly 13 years of bi-monthly donations, I kinda thought I would’ve hit a gallon a long time ago, but whatever — I was never keeping score, even if the people at the Blood Center were.

Do you donate blood? If you don’t, please consider it. Like I said, it’s a very easy way to be a good person, and it really does make a difference in people’s lives.

+ + + + +

’Skins Watch: I keep seeing all these articles analyzing whether a ’Skins renaming would or wouldn’t result in a financial windfall based on new merch sales. Personally, I don’t care, because there should never be a price on doing the right thing — a sentiment anyone should be able to embrace, no matter which side of the debate you’re on or how you define what “the right thing” is. … Interesting piece by the son of former Washington Bullets owner Abe Pollin, who has some advice for Daniel Snyder on how to handle the renaming of a franchise (thanks, Phil). … Reprinted from yesterday’s comments: Teen-aged members of the Spokane Tribe in Washington State attend a high school whose teams are called the Redskins, and they’re totally fine with that.

Ok, I think the sublimated pattern thing is getting kinda dumb. Woodgrain? Why? At least things like tiger stripes for LSU or the “feathers” for the Seahawks make sense for the team. The only purpose these serve is to thwart counterfeiters, and realistically the guy who’s buying a jersey for $30 knows it’s a fake and doesn’t care about the wood pattern on the numbers that you can’t see from more than 10 feet away in the first place.

Tom V.|
July 2, 2014 at 9:17 am |

I wouldn’t call it an incredibly good thing with the sublimated patterns, but I don’t think there’s that much harm. First, with a pattern like this it’s so minor that like you say, it won’t be noticed 10 feet away, it is pretty hard to see in the photo at the top of the page, it just looks like weird shadowing or wrinkles in the jersey. Secondly, if there’s something it represents, like say the university specifically uses some species of wood in it’s buildings that is prominent that represents strength and blah blah blah…it’s fine. But again, as long as it pretty much just viewable to the players. Last year I forget who it was that went with the stone pattern on their helmets because that stone was prominent on campus…blah blah blah…anyone not familiar with what it is is not going to get it and probably think it’s dumb. I would have. If you’re a casual viewer watching a team you’re not familiar with, you shouldn’t need prominent elements of the jersey explained to you if they don’t make sense at first glance.

Dumb Guy|
July 2, 2014 at 8:00 am |

Brinke, you’re gonna make it after all.

I couldn’t wait to comment on the MTM font, then actually read what your wrote. I’m glad I’m not the only one.

(meow)

ColinSTL|
July 2, 2014 at 11:23 am |

Also a little trivia about the Peignot (sp?) font:

It was used as the basis for the logo of KPLR-TV here in St. Louis during the late 70s-early 80s. I’ll try to find a pic and post it ASAP.

Mark in Shiga|
July 2, 2014 at 12:38 pm |

More Peignot trivia: it was used by WOR-TV during Mets games to show the score between innings for at least one season back in the late ’80s or early ’90s. They didn’t use the descending-style numerals, though.

I remember Peignot occasionally being used on the number board on the game show High Rollers in the late seventies. Toward the end of the show’s run in 1980, they had replaced the “3” and “5” with Stymie Black.

Dumb Guy|
July 2, 2014 at 8:02 am |

Those NFL medalliaons (like the Falcons one mentioned) also made for great belt buckles.

Michael Lewis (and some other guy) also crunched the numbers on this – they found that controlling for other variables, the ‘Skins have lost brand equity over the last 10 years and there’s financial windfall to come from changing a team name, regardless of politics.

Pullquote: Our research, the marketing logic and the survey data all point to the same conclusion: Retaining the Redskins name borders on managerial malpractice.

Phil Hecken|
July 2, 2014 at 8:28 am |

“Retaining the Redskins name borders on managerial malpractice.”

~~~

That might be about the only thing Snyder would see as wrong with it.

arrScott|
July 2, 2014 at 8:43 am |

Phil’s comment assumes Snyder has any interest in, or even awareness of the concept of, good management. I cannot think of any prominent American with less demonstrated skill in business management than Snyder. Not meant as snark: His business record is extraordinarily poor. The guy is a deal-maker of some repute, but his record of managing enterprises is just remarkably bad.

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 9:09 am |

I cannot think of any prominent American with less demonstrated skill in business management than Snyder.

A certain Donald J. Trump would give Snyder a run for the money.

Anyway, if it’s true that 30% of Washingtonians find the name offensive, that’s a surprisingly high and would point to a managerial malpractice. It tells me Snyder is making the classic mistake of thinking the most vocal members of the audience speak for the majority (the old 80/20 rule of talk radio). It seems he’s overestimating the backlash to a name change – the casual fans could do without the name and the hardcore fans will follow the team regardless of the name.

I think they put too much stock in the team name. They only go back 10 years, and note that the other most negative teams are the Raiders, Rams & Browns. The Redskins last Superbowl appearance was 1991. The Rams and Raiders were 2001 and 2002. It’s not really that surprising that a team who’s been terrible for over 20 years is losing more equity than teams that have only been bad for 12. Changing the uniform or altering the colors (like, say turning the yellow into metallic gold or adding black) would also likely result in a temporary increase of sales.

Or the team could just start actually winning. That might help too.

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 8:41 am |

It’s not really that surprising that a team who’s been terrible for over 20 years is losing more equity than teams that have only been bad for 12.

Did you see the part where they controlled for other variables? Of course, this is where we’d like to see the work, as math teachers say, but it’s kind of an obvious thing they’d always account for.

I was just noting that we — collectively — tend to criticize anything that’s new just because it is different and especially anything from Nike.

It would be an interesting exercise to look at the initial reaction to some of the designs we now think are great.

We all love throwbacks, and recoil in horror at attempts to think forward. Disastrous Mercury Mets not withstanding, some of the Turn Ahead the Clock looks were kind of neat, like the Diamondbacks with the wraparound snake.

Just trying to advance the discussion a little beyond this new element or that new element is miserable or stupid.

arrScott|
July 2, 2014 at 12:52 pm |

That is often my first reaction, especially with regard to recent Nike “designs”. To be fair to me, however, Nike really does usually do extraordinarily crappy work for college and pro teams.

But in this case, I think these are terrific unis for the Sooners. So, you know, it’s not all about anti-innovation, anti-Nike bias.

She will always be the New Girl — that’s her name (at least on this site).

Dumb Guy|
July 2, 2014 at 8:44 am |

Two words: Honeymoon Suite

arrScott|
July 2, 2014 at 8:44 am |

Re Belgium jerseys: What is the little black mark below the collar and on the sleeve? I never got a good look during the game, but it kind of looks like a little patch of a black scarf, which is probably too odd (and too cool) to be the real story.

I’d love to donate blood, but unfortunately, after visiting a mobile clinic a few years ago in college, I answered this question truthfully: “From 1977 to the present, have you had sexual contact with another male, even once?” I didn’t know at the time, and was astonished to find out, that this meant the banhammer. It’s unfortunate that this archaic policy either a) keeps so many people from donating, or b) forces them to lie on the questionaire.

It is indeed an absurd policy. I know that there are some grass-roots efforts afoot to get it changed.

Dumb Guy|
July 2, 2014 at 9:11 am |

Years ago I gave blood and then afterward the phlebotomist(?) says, “Oh, you have a tattoo. We can’t accept your blood.”

Not sure what the rules are nowadays as I’ve never donated again.
I imagine they have changed since Paul is in the gaggle of gallons club.

Brian|
July 2, 2014 at 9:22 am |

The rule is wait one year after you get the tattoo if you got the tattoo in a state that does not regulate tattoo facilities. The worry is over tattoo parlor reusing ink and not using sterilized needles.

If I gave consistently with one organization, I would be a member of the gallon club. As it is, the Red Cross calls me as soon as I am available to give because I am O- and CMV- meaning often my blood goes to babies and others with a weak immune system.

St. Silva|
July 2, 2014 at 10:36 am |

One word HERO.

BrianC|
July 2, 2014 at 11:34 am |

You used to have to wait a long time (I think it was years, but I’m not sure) after having surgery for some reason. I’ve been donating, not regularly enough, but regularly since I was 18, during the Taft Administration it seems like sometimes ;). The only time I was turned down was when a certain hospital was having a drive at work and not the Red Cross. They turned me down because I’m a brain tumor survivor. I’d never heard that before or since (I stick with the Red Cross, they have better snacks, anyway).

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 9:24 am |

Less archaic or draconian, but I’m not allowed to give blood because I lived in the U.K. at one point between 1980 and 1996. Not sure what the reasoning is there.

The reason is there is mad cow disease is believed to have jumped to humans as variant Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease (vCJD). There is no test in humans to screen blood donors for vCJD. It is also why the ask if you have received dura mater(brain covering) graft.

Mark in Shiga|
July 2, 2014 at 12:44 pm |

Terriblehuman, I’ve been refused whle trying to donate here in Japan just because I once visited the UK. And I didn’t even eat any steak!

JenInChicago|
July 2, 2014 at 1:08 pm |

I am also not able to give blood as my mother’s sister died of Creutzfeld-Jakob in 2000. They looked at me like I had the plague. The woman literally backed away.

ChrisH|
July 2, 2014 at 11:27 am |

Even with the amount of testing done, ‘positives’ for infectious contaminations sometimes get missed (some viral strains are harder to detect, while others are constantly mutating).
Relaxing or doing away with some of the restrictions put on donors potentially puts the blood supply and the recipients at risk, and may also add costs to the volunteer(?) organizations accepting donations.
I always appreciate Paul’s call for this readers to donate blood if they’re able to (I do 4x a year), but if they can’t there are alternatives; monetary and time donations help the drives as well.

Very cool. Kinda funny, though, that the featured US player is Landon Donovan.

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 9:18 am |

Also (but less relevant to US fans), Colombia is represented by Radamel Falcao.

scottrj|
July 2, 2014 at 8:51 am |

While I enjoyed scrolling through those World Cup newsgame illustrations, it’s unfortunate that the player the artist chose to depict the U.S. wasn’t even on the squad. (Same is true for Colombia, although there the player would’ve been on the squad but for injury.)

Jason M (DC)|
July 2, 2014 at 8:52 am |

The Oklahoma uniforms sounds like some sort of compromise to me. They are keeping their regular (traditional) set, but are still marching out a completely different mix-and-match set for “sometimes” games? Seems to me that Oklahoma wants to keep their traditional uniforms, but some sort of deal with Nike is allowing Swooshie to introduce this set.

Phil Hecken|
July 2, 2014 at 9:24 am |

It’s an “alternate” set. All the kids have one (or three) now.

Joe O|
July 2, 2014 at 8:54 am |

I have been donating blood since I turned 17 fairly regularly. For the last few years I donate a lot more because I switched to donating platelets. It takes longer (1.5-2 hours) and you get to donate every 7-14 days. I’m just short of 13 gallons. If you have been donating whole blood, you donate a pint at a time. So you hit a Gallon on your eighth donation, which I’m sure you did years ago!

Oye. Of course the American flag was on the Belgium jersey. I haven’t been watching every minute of the World Cup and haven’t gotten a close look at all the uniforms, but at least some of the uniforms feature the flags of the two teams participating in that match. That means Belgium should have the Argentinian flag on their uniform in the next match.

The OU number font looks to these eyes as just a fat version of the WVU number font.

Dan|
July 2, 2014 at 9:08 am |

I am aware that working with the base jersey template makes a “custom” design much more economical, but I feel like sometimes Nike assigns arbitrary value or arbitrary visuals to features that were dictated by the template and not the specific design. The “horns” are a primary example in this case- those are armpit vents, why do they need to be woodgrained when the rest of the front isn’t?

I am a UF fan, and I was waiting for us to jump forward in designs, and after seeing this template, I am glad that all they chose to mess with was the number font. I can see them having made that armpit vent white and calling it something crazy like gator teeth or claws, or doing a gator skin pattern there, when really it is just a different piece of fabric to play with.

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 9:29 am |

I’m guessing it’s just a proprietary feature that makes it:
1) Easily distinguishable from 3rd party or generic replica jerseys, and
2) Outdated in a few years when they come out with another design.

Also, having some weird design draws attention to the “innovations” in a “high tech” jersey.

Connie DC|
July 2, 2014 at 9:11 am |

“… Speaking of the flag-desecration thing, Johnny Gomes of the Red Sox decided to ‘support’ the USA soccer team by wearing this costume (thanks, Phil). … ”

I’m tired of “flag desecration” as a Uni Watch shibboleth. I know, I know, there’s a US Flag Code and it does not abide many of the placements and uses of the flag or its stars-and-stripes motif that are common these days. Perhaps because some of us here (well, me, for example) are so damn tired of the flag and flag motifs employed for commercial or right-wing political purposes (that stupid flag lapel politicians have to wear these days, fer kreissakes), it was fun for a while to use super-patriot vocabulary — “flag desecration’ — against super-patriots.

But I am indeed tired of it. No flag is “sacred.” Because I love the country and respect what the flag means to millions of people — not least those who served in the military — I’m glad to voluntarily observe Flag Code strictures. But you don’t have to. And by “you,” I mean Johnny Gomes and football helmet vendors and anarchist demonstrators and underwear designers and T-shirt vendors and, well, everybody.

If you don’t like the use of the flag — or flag elements — on athletic uniforms (and I hate them unless we’re talking about official national teams), well, give ’em hell. But maybe not with that sanctify/desecrate usage.

By coincidence, *I’m* tired of teams and leagues wrapping themselves in the flag as a form of cheap, mindless jingoism. When the latter stops, so will the former.

Also: Conn, you’ve been a daily reader for years, but we have many readers who are newer and/or more sporadic visitors to the site. One person’s long-running trope is another’s “Hmmm, that’s new.”

(For the record: I don’t care about the U.S. Flag Code, which is voluntary and would never pass Constitutional muster if it were enforced. My use of “flag desecration” is meant to turn the tables, to point out that these cheap attempts to “honor” the flag actually dishonor it.)

“… By coincidence, *I’m* tired of teams and leagues wrapping themselves in the flag as a form of cheap, mindless jingoism…”

Me, too. Totally.

“… One person’s long-running trope is another’s ‘Hmmm, that’s new’…”

True. Just saying that for this reader, the trope expiration date has passed.

Phil Hecken|
July 2, 2014 at 10:19 am |

There is never an expiration date on trope.

Pedro|
July 2, 2014 at 3:45 pm |

“*I’m* tired of teams and leagues wrapping themselves in the flag as a form of cheap, mindless jingoism. When the latter stops, so will the former.” -Paul

“Jingoism: the feelings and beliefs of people who think that their country is always right and who are in favor of aggressive acts against other countries.” -Merriam-Webster

So showing pride in the USA, for you, automatically means that you think the US is always right and that you are in favor of military interventions in other countries? That doesn’t make sense to me.

Pedro|
July 2, 2014 at 3:58 pm |

I think it’s a shame that displaying the flag, or singing the national anthem, or wearing uniforms with a flag motif has to be such a divisive political issue for some people. I personally wish that taking pride in our country could be something that all Americans could agree on in a time when the two sides of the country seem to be drifting farther and farther apart.

I’m not a scientist nor a doctor, but I feel like the matte helmets have to be less safe than the normal gloss finish. My reasoning is that wouldn’t the matte finish almost grab onto an opponents helmet, thus putting more strain or force on the neck and head. I feel this would be especially true if it was matte on matte. For safety reasons wouldn’t it be better to have a slick finish so on a helment to helment collision the helmets would slide to one side or the other thus reducing the chances of the jarring hit?

When I was growing up it was a new trend for baseball bats to have a matte finish in order to “grip” the ball better. Most likely this was a marketing tool but I feel like there has to be some truth to the physics of it.

I don’t know if there have been any studies done and I don’t have time to do the research, but it something that I have wondered about for a while.

As another non-scientist, I think the collisions are quick enough where that slight additional “grabbing” force just isn’t an issue. The two helmets are hitting and bouncing off of each other, not being forcefully rubbed together.

Bill|
July 2, 2014 at 9:24 am |

I love the new Oklahoma uniforms. The lettering and numbers are goofy, and I could do without the side horns on the jersey. But I like the thick collar and the contrast cuffs on the crimson jerseys. And I love the white helmet and crimson pants. Hope OU wears them as pictured.

Unfortunately, one of the players I’m acquaintances with mentioned that the Sooners will wear all red for the Tennessee game on September 13th. I too prefer the color contrast pictured. (Of course, plans could change or he misunderstood)

just Joe|
July 2, 2014 at 11:01 am |

I don’t know if these collars (also used by UGA) have a name, but I nominate Sheriff Woody. Especially when rendered in red, they remind me of Toy Story.

Jim Gregg|
July 2, 2014 at 2:48 pm |

I guess OU is planning on getting hooked by the Horns this year? I would think OU fans would despise horns on any of their uniforms.

Sad when such a high level traditional program like OU thinks it has to get Nike-ized.

Glen|
July 2, 2014 at 7:51 pm |

Isn’t it a little weird that their uniforms have “horns” and their new helmets look like Nebraska replicas?

Pedro|
July 2, 2014 at 3:40 pm |

I seem to recall that the “horns” design was used as an homage to the so-called “jaws” of Husky Stadium on the new UW design. This confirms what we already know, that these Nike marketing terms are utter bullshit. I, for one, am getting tired of it. Not EVERYTHING on a uniform needs to symbolize one thing or another.

Andrew|
July 2, 2014 at 9:25 am |

Maybe Edwin Jackson’s uni is being shrunk, or switched out on purpose by the laundry guy because he looks terrible and sloppy. He actually looked like a ball player with the high cuffs. Too bad he didn’t have stirrups.

Howard and Lukaku swapped jerseys yesterday, which I thought was odd at first (I expected Howard to swap with Thibault Courtois, Belgium’s ‘keeper, position-for-position, you know). Then I realized they did it because they were teammates at Everton last season. Probably had that one worked out since the end of the Premier League year.

And the flag thing usually also has the date of the game on it as well. They often do it for Champions League finals (with club crests) and other important events.

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 9:43 am |

Yeah, I think it’s common for club teammates to swap jerseys.

And it ended up being appropriate since Lukaku scored the game winning goal (and changed the match when he came on) and Howard was the Man of the Match.

Based on the principle of full location name only (as opposed to team name, name or location initials, or logo, or any combination thereof), the only two I can think of off the top of my head, since the start of divisional play, are the 1976-81 Chicago White Sox and the 2011-present Texas Rangers.

As for the NBA and NHL, I can think of two more teams: the New York Knicks (except for the early 1980s), and the 2007-13 Dallas Stars.

Additionally for the NBA, I just remembered the old Charlotte Hornets, and the New Orleans Hornets/Pelicans. Though NO did wear a “HORNETS” jersey for a while when they were playing part of their home schedule in Oklahoma City in the aftermath of Katrina.

walter|
July 2, 2014 at 10:47 am |

I remember thinking the inherent logic was that the “A’s” was on the hat, obviating the need to repeat it on the jersey.

I’ve said it before, I love the 1981-86 Mariners unis. Great colors, shoulder stripes, awesome baby blue aways for a couple years, and this absolutely fantastic cap logo. Such good stuff.

Mark in Shiga|
July 2, 2014 at 2:51 pm |

The Padres used to have “San Diego” in tiny letternig above “padres” back in the ’70s.

ChrisH|
July 2, 2014 at 2:56 pm |

Just as the Tampa Bay MLB team did in ‘1979’.

ChrisH|
July 2, 2014 at 2:58 pm |

Meaning that they had “Tampa Bay” in tiny lettering, not “San Diego”.

random reader|
July 2, 2014 at 9:49 am |

Thanks for posting the link about the Nike World Cup fonts. Great and informative link worth sharing.

Some quotes that stood out to me:

“functionally, we are also looking to improve legibility for the spectators at home and in the stands.” — If only that applied to the rest of Nike’s operations, like college football and basketball…

“DB: how do you justify the cost and time of developing a new custom typeface?
SM: for each federation this is the pinnacle moment for their players, fans and everyone carrying that country’s passport! we see this element of the design as a vital piece of the team’s storytelling.”

Nike and “storytelling” hand-in-hand once again…

I also liked the pictures showing the development of the design of the Dutch typeface.

Phil P|
July 2, 2014 at 11:54 am |

I for one like that Nike is doing something unique for each team, as opposed to the template approach (like the stupid circle around the number look a few years back). They did well with this

“But older tribal members sure do remember insults about their heritage, although it wasn’t the Redskins name that was used.”

“We shouldn’t change it because everybody in politics wants us to change the name,” he said. “We’ve been here for thousands for years. It’s people who weren’t raised here who are bothered by it.”

“Says Ford, “I use the name proudly. I wear it with respect.””

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 10:17 am |

Those are all good arguments for leaving the folks at Wellpinit High School alone, but they’re irrelevant to the question of whether a professional football team with no connection to any Native Americans from using them as a mascot.

In a way, there’s a parallel to the use of the n-word today. I know some folks like to say, “But rapper use that word all the time” to excuse racist comments, but I think it’s perfectly healthy for the target of a slur to own and use it as a term of endearment. That doesn’t make it any less of a slur coming from outside the group, but it lessens the sting. Likewise, I see no issue with Native Americans using the “redskin” to refer to themselves.

Absolutely. I don’t think anyone here is trying to tell Native American groups that they can’t reclaim or own the word.

But here’s the flip side to that, from the same article:

“One thing that annoys me,” says John Teters, registrar for the school district, “is that we’re used as an excuse for this asinine process. You name it, Cleveland Indians, Washington Redskins, whenever those names come up, the school gets called. ‘If you guys can do it, why can’t we?’ We’re somehow used as a justification.”

It’s the old white racist’s claim of “black people use the word, so I should be able to.”

Dan Snyder isn’t a Native American. I’m not aware that his organization employs even a single Native American (a pretty good bet that they don’t, since they’re trotting out phony Inuit “chiefs” to defend the name). Big difference.

Adam N.|
July 2, 2014 at 11:55 am |

I disagree. I think “society” needs to determine if a word is disparaging/insulting. If it is, no one should use it. If it isn’t, anyone should be free to use it.

The notion that the “target” can use the term to “reclaim” it is too much of a grey area. Who qualifies as a “target”. Who gets to decide? John Legend is part Native American, but got blasted a bit for wearing a head dress. Is he not Native American enough? Is there an objective measurement? Does he need to wear some sort of patch or carry a membership card to be allowed to use it?

If you don’t think “society” has already entered a judgment on the propriety of the term “Redskins,” then I invite to you try the following exercise: Go to an Indian reservation and start greeting people with “Hiya, Redskin.”

Let us know how it goes.

Adam N.|
July 2, 2014 at 12:45 pm |

I wouldn’t do that, because I don’t make a habit of greeting people by their ethnicity. I wouldn’t walk into a bar south of the border and say “hiya, Mexicans!” either. That doesn’t mean Mexican is a disparaging term.

The fact that an NFL is called the Redskins and enjoys a loyal following, and the fact that you linked to an article with Native Americans saying they have no problem with the term is evidence that “society” hasn’t entered a judgement. You have. More people have than did several years ago. But it is not a widely accepted social standard yet, the way the n-word, or Nazi sybolism is.

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 12:52 pm |

In the recent trademark registration cancellation, there was plenty of evidence showing that the term was disparaging in 1967 including these film clips.

Maybe the reason you don’t see it as disparaging is because it’s disparaging as well as outdated (like, no one calls me “Oriental” or “Mongloid” on the street).

I’m confused. How exactly does a movie filmed in the 1940’s with a plot set in a period at least 70 years prior, determine that a word is disparaging in the late 1960’s?

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 1:12 pm |

Because it counters the canard that the term only recently became a slur.

Phil Hecken|
July 2, 2014 at 2:42 pm |

“I wouldn’t walk into a bar south of the border and say “hiya, Mexicans!” either. That doesn’t mean Mexican is a disparaging term.”

~~~

Because Mexicanisn’t a disparaging term. Now, if you’d said “wetback”we’d be penning your eulogy, you would have a fair comparison.

And if you don’t think “wetback” is disparaging, then feel free to use it to address any Mexican you meet. Otherwise, don’t use it.

Phil Hecken|
July 2, 2014 at 12:23 pm |

Did you mean Pharrell Williams?

Adam N.|
July 2, 2014 at 12:38 pm |

Yes. Is 11am too late to claim I was tired?

BvK1126|
July 2, 2014 at 12:43 pm |

“John Legend is part Native American, but got blasted a bit for wearing a head dress. Is he not Native American enough?”

Pharrell Williams (as Phil just pointed out) – NOT John Legend – got blasted for wearing the headdress, not so much because he wasn’t “Native American enough,” but because he wore it in an inappropriate manner. This article from Indian Country Today explains why simply claiming Native American heritage doesn’t immunize one from criticism for inappropriate use of ceremonial garb that many Indian tribes consider sacred:

I don’t understand why people use nuance as a reason to do or not to do something. Appropriateness of ethnic imagery is an issue full of gray areas – that’s why we discuss things rather than send people to jail in handcuffs for breaking etiquette.

There’s also a difference between reclaiming a slur and using a sacred symbol (or at least something I’ve seen described as such) as a fashion prop. You might also remember Madonna, who was raised Catholic, getting stick for using Catholic imagery in her music videos.

BvK1126|
July 2, 2014 at 1:30 pm |

“I wouldn’t do that, because I don’t make a habit of greeting people by their ethnicity. I wouldn’t walk into a bar south of the border and say ‘hiya, Mexicans!’ either. That doesn’t mean Mexican is a disparaging term.”

Okay, but would you go that that same Indian reservation and refer openly to the inhabitants who live there as “Redskins”? (E.g. “How many Redskinds live on this reservation?”) If not, why not?

terriblehuman|
July 2, 2014 at 1:56 pm |

When the ‘Skins honored the Navajo code talkers during a half time show last season, it was telling that they were never once referred to by the term that the team claims to be about “honor and respect”.

Aaron|
July 2, 2014 at 10:09 am |

Is it just me, or does the new white OU helmet bear a strong resemblance to their former rival’s, Nebraska? Perhaps that’s not a big deal since they’re no longer in the same conference, but still a bit surprising to me given the intensity of that rivalry for so many years.

BvK1126|
July 2, 2014 at 12:25 pm |

I’m not an OU fan, but the white helmets don’t make of Nebraska at all. The schools’ shades of red are quite distinct form one another. Rather, the white helmets make me think of the Sooners’ football history.

Oklahoma has a substantial tradition of wearing white helmets, especially during Bud Wilkinson’s heyday in the 1950s. They’ve revived that look a few times as part of some of their throwback uniforms over the last dozen years or so. The webpage Paul linked to in the lede has plenty of illustrations of the old uniforms with white helmets and photos of the throwbacks.

Glen|
July 2, 2014 at 7:58 pm |

That’s the first thing that came to my mind yesterday. Funny that a decade ago people were saying that Nebraska’s helmets were too plain, and now teams are developing alternates with similar looks.

Dudam|
July 2, 2014 at 10:10 am |

Last night I had a dream that I was hanging out with Paul at his place. Someone that he had done some work for decided to compensate him with gift cards to Domino’s Pizza. Dream Paul was similar to Reality Paul in that he refused to partake in nasty chain pizza. Instead he explained to me his plan to sell the cards for less than the face value of the cards in order to get some cash out of the deal.

Here’s a company that makes generic but good-looking basketball shorts

I knew what these were going to look like before I clicked the link. Back in the mid-90s, those style shorts were the rage in my HS and other black communities on Long Island. You couldn’t find a pick-up game that didn’t have at least one pair on the court.

There was a sporting goods store in Harlem called Olaf’s that would custom make the shorts in any color combo you wanted. Dude’s haD 3/4 pairs to match their different sneakers. Guys on the basketball team paid for shorts in school colors to wear at practice. There were even knockoff shorts that didn’t have the “Olaf’s” tag on the inside.

A good friend of mine made some good $$ taking orders and making trips to Harlem for everybody.

TL;DR version – I’d been thinking about these recently, now I’m gonna have to get a pair.

BrianC|
July 2, 2014 at 11:28 am |

“Paul Derringer and Bucky Walters from the 1939 Reds wearing two different jersey logos. Turns out both logos are shown in Dressed to the Nines, but it’s odd to see both of them being worn at the same time”

Different undersleeves, too.

KSaw|
July 2, 2014 at 11:32 am |

Yesterday I saw a photo of all four OU jerseys next to each other and the two that popped out were the original sets. The new white are horrible and the thought of going full crimson for a game sounds disgusting.

Going full crimson will be going red grape like K-State went full purple grape years ago.

Jared Buccola|
July 2, 2014 at 11:40 am |

Oklahoma released a photo of the new jerseys with the hashtag “#bringthewood”, maybe it’s one of their team slogans

BvK1126|
July 2, 2014 at 12:55 pm |

Nope. It’s brand new Nike-speak for this particular uniform. Lost Letterman has a good assessment of it here:

Key phrase: Nike explained its “Bring the Wood” mantra for these uniforms in typical Swoosh fashion…

MEANS|
July 2, 2014 at 1:42 pm |

I saw that phrase too and it just shows even more how horrible that custom type face is. Look at all the inconsistencies in the weights.

Robert W.|
July 2, 2014 at 12:07 pm |

According to the New York Blood Center website they give out the gold gallon club card when you’ve reached 5-9 gallons donated. Assuming Paul has gone every other month since 9/11 that’s around 77 pints of blood donated which would be just over 9 gallons. He’s almost reached the black card status! Amazing.

Ugh, I fear Paul and Phil are right that it’s just a matter of time before the MLB All-Star Game goes to special game-specific uniforms for the teams. Because you can’t sell replica All-Star Game jerseys if you don’t make them, right?

If it happens, thought, I’m pretty sure I’ll stop watching the All-Star Game. The game has always captivated me, from the first time I watched it as a kid until now, because of all the different uniforms I got to see in one single game. Without that draw, it’s just another exhibition game to me.

walter|
July 2, 2014 at 2:51 pm |

They already have them for the Home Run Derby, which is not to suggest they won’t whip up an additional set for the ASG, itself.

I like the team-specific idea better than everyone using the Twins version.

Robert W.|
July 2, 2014 at 3:49 pm |

I agree, some were done better than expected while others make no sense and will look horrible paired with the jersey’s. What really irks me is the color inconsistencies, there’s no real difference between AL teams and NL teams so why not just make them all white in the front, or white for AL and gray or secondary color for NL?

GregT|
July 2, 2014 at 1:00 pm |

This comment is late — it relates to yesterday’s travelogue (which was really fun) — but it seems that nobody has yet posted about Paul’s rental car.
That car appears to be the new Fiat 500. The original 500 was the inspiration for this sweet bit of Britpop,500 (Shake Baby Shake) by Lush, and their lead singer Miki Berenyi.

Brian|
July 2, 2014 at 1:16 pm |

The Sixers might be making a VERY small (and useful) tweak to their logo…

Regarding Belgium captain Vincent Kompany’s armband; Jan Vertonghen captained the side in their final group game against South Korea. In the first half, he wore the flag armband and had changed to the FIFA version in the second half. Someone from FIFA must have noticed it and made him change.

I looked around the MLB shop to notice a few things about the “Authentic Collection” caps.
9 teams have 3 or more caps in the “Authentic Collection (Astros, Indians, Orioles, Cardinals, Pirates, Reds, Braves, Mets, Nationals).
8 teams have only 1 regularly used cap in the “Authentic Collection” (Angels, Royals, Blue Jays, Rays, Yankees, Dodgers, Padres, Cubs)
3 teams have at least 1 hat without any letters on the front (Blue Jays, Orioles Home and Road, Red Sox alternate).
As far as the All Star caps go I noticed the following: With the American League having homefield it appears that any National League clubs that would have had white front panels were instead given grey front panels (Dodgers, Padres, Cubs, Brewers).
Also, it appears that the logos of most teams have been altered so that the color of the logo will match the base color and contrast the front panel color. All except for Arizona. The Arizona All Star Cap is Black with a Red front Panel and a Red “A”. The Red “A” is worn on the all Black alternate cap. Perhaps they should have used a Red Base, a Black Front Panel and a Red “A” instead.
It is also disappointing that they are the awful “Diamond Era” models. The mesh still looks much cheaper than the polyester that typically appears on field. Keep the mesh in batting practice and out of the games.

In the official MLB image with all 30 caps, the Angels are positioned as though they are still the Anaheim Angels, not the LAAofA.

Jeremy|
July 2, 2014 at 5:29 pm |

I was looking at the additional picture link and saw that both of the uniforms have “teeth” you just can’t see it from far away on the colored one because it is the same color essentially except the teeth is the wood texture.